Was Dutch right about wiping between shots?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I had issues with cleaning between shots.
I generally fire 25 rounds a session, and don't need cleaning between rounds. My barrels are lapped, and easy to load and clean. I use simple green + water to clean, and balistrol as a final clean. I don't believe in "oils". Maybe the cleaning and barrels condition helps with the no clean between shots?
 
I've been using Dutch's method inc. wiping between shots for the past 20+ years and it's worked for me. It forces me to pay a little more attention to my loading procedure and as a result I can't recall the last time I dry balled; it's been a while. Long ago when I was young I'd rush to get off the next shot and that's when "stuff" happens. The only speed-up I still use is coning all my muzzles to allow for ease of starting at the muzzle. For me, adding the extra step of wiping between shots helps with consistent accuracy and ease of loading which my old hands now cherish more than ever.
 
Offhand matches are the only ones I care about, for those of you who want to use Dutch's method, GREAT! I am happy for you.

I bought the book and experimented with the drying out of the Machine oiled dry lubed patches and the whole nine yards and shot off a good solid benchrest and accuracy was OK, not any better than my usual method but OK.

For offhand matches or hunting or woods walks it "in my opinion" is not worth the bother.

For offhand matches and the like people should work on getting a consistent shooting position, dry firing to reduce flinching and follow through, and follow through (yes, it is that important). Those habits will boost your scores.
I shoot because I enjoy it. I don't hunt but often shoot competition not because I need trophies or titles, but because I enjoy competing and socializing with other shooters.

I've shot just about every discipline from NRA service rifle / F-class, to USPSA/IDPA, to Skeet/sporting clays, to Sillhoette, Centerfire/rimfire Benchrest, airgun field-target, Schutzen, and now muzzleloading.

There are many ways, to do just about anything, and I like to discuss, learn, and try for myself, as many of them as I can in terms of shooting.
 
Last edited:
Snug spit patch.

No need to wipe between shots even after 20-30.
Didn't get very good accuracy with spit, as shown on the test target below. 😒
20241121_134531.jpg
 
Offhand matches are the only ones I care about, for those of you who want to use Dutch's method, GREAT! I am happy for you.

I bought the book and experimented with the drying out of the Machine oiled dry lubed patches and the whole nine yards and shot off a good solid benchrest and accuracy was OK, not any better than my usual method but OK.

For offhand matches or hunting or woods walks it "in my opinion" is not worth the bother.

For offhand matches and the like people should work on getting a consistent shooting position, dry firing to reduce flinching and follow through, and follow through (yes, it is that important). Those habits will boost your scores.
I agree with this. Having shot military match for years, offhand should consume 90% of your shooting time. It translates to kneeling, sitting and prone positions.
I shoot my flintlock long rifles for the express purpose of increasing military match scores.

I’ve always had a dilemma that I can’t resolve. The dilemma being, did the expert riflemen of the revolutionary war who decimated the Indian scouts and later the British officers actually run around pounding balls down their rifle barrels and swabbing between shots? I think not.
They were expert offhand shoots which is why the long rifle developed into the perfect offhand instrument. The only thing even close to its design perfection is the M1 Garands that I use.

So what did they know that we do not? I’m not really into thinking that I have all the answers or even half of them.

I would say that they knew how to shoot. And if they needed a perfect shot (squirrels), they got close.
 
I have a new englander .50 with a slightly pitted bore. Bought it for almost nothing. I get one hole accuracy at 50 yards with a peep sight. I weigh the round balls I use. I use no patch lube , spit, oil, ect. Completely dry. It’s a loose patch, pushes down with no struggle. But I use a wad of cream of wheat or a wool wad between the powder and ball. I believe that makes the black powder burn more completely. I wipe between shots with a lightly damp patch , both sides. But I must dismount the barrel after 15 shots or so for a thorough bucket of water cleaning, the Thomson center breech needs it or it’s misfire city.
 
But I must dismount the barrel after 15 shots or so for a thorough bucket of water cleaning, the Thomson center breech needs it or it’s misfire city.
This is what I am seeking the best solution for. Accuracy is very important, but so is reliability. High performance equals tighter tolerances and thus less reliability. This is why soldiers and hunters don't usually use benchrest rifles. That being said, finding the right balance for what you do, is 90% of the fun!
 
@lv2tinker22, Dutch's system is geared toward precise accuracy on paper targets shooting a patched round ball in a percussion rifle using real black powder. Not a really long term problem as it is a great tool for load development. As you become familiar with your rifle and learn about it's construction at the breech, you can start to make alterations in Dutch's system based on your shooting requirements. At the target range, one needs to wipe the bore between shots differently if one has a chambered breech or a flat breech. One needs to learn how to keep the flash channel clear of fouling introduced by firing or wiping the bore. With a percussion rifle, run a wet patch to the breech. While that patched jag is at the breech, fire a cap to send fouling in te flash channel to be captured in the wet patch and pulled out of the barrel. You should have a loading/wiping working rod with a jag sized so that if the jag is wrapped damp cleaning patch, it will practically slide down a clean barrel. When wiping between shots, that damp patch slides over the fouling from the muzzle to the breech and will bunch up to remove fouling from the grooves.

For hunting or shooting at large reactive targets such as silhouettes or clanger type targets, the "never wipe" method can be used. You do need to start off with a clean and dry flash channel. Follow on shots generally keep some fouling out of the flash channel and the lubricated patch pushes fouling from the grooves to between the powder and the patch. That fouling is shot out with the patched ball.

Your load development will help you choose the final method that meets your required accuracy.

What you are striving for is to maintain consistent conditions in the bore and flash channel from shot to shot.

Make good smoke.
 
Last edited:
I agree with this. Having shot military match for years, offhand should consume 90% of your shooting time. It translates to kneeling, sitting and prone positions.
I shoot my flintlock long rifles for the express purpose of increasing military match scores.

I’ve always had a dilemma that I can’t resolve. The dilemma being, did the expert riflemen of the revolutionary war who decimated the Indian scouts and later the British officers actually run around pounding balls down their rifle barrels and swabbing between shots? I think not.
They were expert offhand shoots which is why the long rifle developed into the perfect offhand instrument. The only thing even close to its design perfection is the M1 Garands that I use.

So what did they know that we do not? I’m not really into thinking that I have all the answers or even half of them.

I would say that they knew how to shoot. And if they needed a perfect shot (squirrels), they got close.
Plus, they only needed minute of man accuracy. 3” group at 100 yds or so is perfectly good enough-like shooting at gongs.
 
@lv2tinker22, Dutch's system is geared toward precise accuracy on paper targets shooting a patched round ball in a percussion rifleusung real black powder. Not a really long term problem as it is a great tool for load development. As you become familiar with your rifle and learn about it's construction at the breech, you can start to make alterations in Dutch's system based on your shooting requirements. At the target range, one needs to wipe the bore between shots differently if one has a chambered breech or a flat breech. One needs to learn how to keep the flash channel clear of fouling introduced by firing or wiping the bore. With a percussion rifle, run a wet patch to the breech. While that patched jag is at the breech, fire a cap to send fouling in te flash channel to be captured in the wet patch and pulled out of the barrel. You should have a loading/wiping working rod with a jag sized so that if the jag is wrapped damp cleaning patch, it will practically slide down a clean barrel. When wiping between shots, that damp patch slides over the fouling from the muzzle to the breech and will bunch up to remove fouling from the grooves.

For hunting or shooting at large reactive targets such as silhouettes or clanger type targets, the "never wipe" method can be used. You do need to start off with a clean and dry flash channel. Follow on shots generally keep some fouling out of the flash channel and the lubricated patch pushes fouling from the grooves to between the powder and the patch. That fouling is shot out with the patched ball.

Your load development will help you choose the final method that meets your required accuracy.

What you are striving for is to maintain consistent conditions in the bore and flash channel from shot to shot.

Make good smoke.
Thank you, that helps me to understand it better
 
One more point: if a shooter prefers some amount of fouling in his barrel, then he should not swab. If he does not care about fouling in his barrel, then he should not swab. If he wants as close as he can get to zero fouling in his barrel, then he should swab. I don't know any other way to make a decision on swabbing. How many shots you can fire without swabbing is a non-issue. As is what you have always done or what you were taught. Also, "I see no need" is a non-issue, which would fall under "I don't care."
That said, I'm no one and no one should strive to be like me. I have a character defect that urges me to break undecided issues or topics down into the simplest terms so that we need not to be adamant about anyone's opinion or method being the best.
(Except putting a rifle muzzle in or on your mouth; my opinion there borders on extreme.)
 
One more point: if a shooter prefers some amount of fouling in his barrel,
Every rifle or smooth bore I own is more accurate after the initial fouling shot. I only swab after it gets hard to ram the patched ball home. Then it is with the right sized patch and jag that lets the patch slid by the fouling and then bunch up as it's withdrawn pulling the fouling out like this one.
1732508669365.png
 
Every rifle or smooth bore I own is more accurate after the initial fouling shot. I only swab after it gets hard to ram the patched ball home. Then it is with the right sized patch and jag thze at lets the patch slid by the fouling and then bunch up as it's withdrawn pullingnz the fouling out like this one.
View attachment 364151
I'm awful reluctant to disagree but it can't be true that a patch that touches the inside of a barrel slides by the fouling. While it is true the jag will swipe harder when pulling it out. Not to argue, but what we visualize going on in the barrel is not always reality. Many have spoken about crud being pushed against the breech face, and while that seems plausible, I've never known it to be an issue. My cleaning after a session involves scraping and I've not ever found excessive fouling, at least no more than is created by firing. Maybe that's because a gag does not accumulate fouling on the front, but rather the sides. I'm certain we all know that a jag does not stabilize a cleaning patch if we turn the rod in hopes of cleaning the breech face - the jag simply turns inside the stationary patch. To effectively clean the face we must use a rod tip that holds the patch securely so the patch itself turns when the rod is turned, like a bronze or brass screw in brush. I use an undersize brush like those made for cleaning modern bores. One or two folds over that brush insures enough patch material contacts the breech. That method is only my method and I'm sure other shooters have different or better methods. Concerning fouling shots, there is much to say about that advantage, but if hunting, my laziness precludes cleaning if I don't get a shot.
Good shooting, sir.
 
I'm awful reluctant to disagree but it can't be true that a patch that touches the inside of a barrel slides by the fouling. While it is true the jag will swipe harder when pulling it out. Not to argue, but what we visualize going on in the barrel is not always reality. Many have spoken about crud being pushed against the breech face, and while that seems plausible, I've never known it to be an issue. My cleaning after a session involves scraping and I've not ever found excessive fouling, at least no more than is created by firing. Maybe that's because a gag does not accumulate fouling on the front, but rather the sides. I'm certain we all know that a jag does not stabilize a cleaning patch if we turn the rod in hopes of cleaning the breech face - the jag simply turns inside the stationary patch. To effectively clean the face we must use a rod tip that holds the patch securely so the patch itself turns when the rod is turned, like a bronze or brass screw in brush. I use an undersize brush like those made for cleaning modern bores. One or two folds over that brush insures enough patch material contacts the breech. That method is only my method and I'm sure other shooters have different or better methods. Concerning fouling shots, there is much to say about that advantage, but if hunting, my laziness precludes cleaning if I don't get a shot.
Good shooting, sir.
As everyone that has tried to run a snug dry patch down a dirty barrel has found out it is going to get stuck as the crud builds up more and more as it goes down the barrel. If you could get a patch past the crud and pull it back the crud would still build up jamming the patched jag? I do run a dry patch down my barrel but as I have stated in other post I only go down eight or so inches then I pull back a few inches to release the build up before going down again. I also point the rifle to the ground and bump the stock to get the loose debri to fall out. I have never had a misfire after doing this. I do it because it makes it easy to reload a tight ball and I believe my accuracy is consistant which allows me to be able to shoot some fairly tight groups. Is it the only way to get good accuarcy? I don't think so but it is my way! I agree with what you posted!
 
I was somewhat remiss in my earlier posting in that I addressed Dutch's System as it applies to shooting percussion rifles. There are considerations that can be applied to flint lock rifles and also those with chambered breeches. @Mike in FL is correct that even loose patch and jag combinations will push some fouling ahead of the wiping jag. Here I am going to apply a few definitions for my take on the system. The swabbing of the barrel is done with a very wet patch and the time to swab the barrel is to clean the rifle after the shooting session is completed. All that moisture from swabbing won't be removed by a dry patch or two. Wiping is done with a damp patch with most of the moisture squeezed out. Even the combination of patch and jag that will slide down a clean barrel with just the weight of a metal working rod will push some fouling ahead of the jag and patch. The wiping jag will not remove all of the fouling from the grooves to the point the barrel is clean. The goal of the wiping patch and jag is to establish a consistent level of fouling in the bore from shot to shot. Wiping when the ball and patch become hard to load means that fouling is building up bit by bit to the point that bore conditions are not consistent. The impacts of successive shots are often higher from shot to shot until the bore is wiped and the impact point is lowered.

Ditch's System will apply to all ignition systems with respect to establishing ball size, patch material and patch lubricant. Dutch's System in its final form used a dry lubricant based on a water soluble oil in water dried in the patch. Using a dry patch on the ball will mean that the bore must be wiped between shots or the stuck ball as @LME observes is a certainty. LME's method works for him. Where we have to start making alterations to Dutch's System is an understanding of how to wipe the bore.

The classic flat or notched breech face: There is a flash channel either from the pan of a flint lock or from the nipple seat of the drum and nipple percussion lock directly into the powder chamber which is that column of powder between the breech face and the base of the patched ball (for some the base of the conical bullet). We have to prevent fouling from blocking that passage when we wipe between shots. We do that by two methods.
1. We have or working rod marked to stop the wipe about the powder column height from the breech face. Any fouling left as the wiping patch is pushed down the bore will remain above the flash channel or touch hole and be shot out with the next shot. [SECRET NOTE This is essentially what is done by the "never wipe" loaders using the wet patch on the ball and Minie' ball shooters loading their lubed bullets.] Using the wet patched ball as the wiping patch will remove most of the fouling from the bore, it is almost as effective as the wipe then load a patched ball for consistency. Using the wet patched ball as the wiping patch does work fine for woods walk reactive targets and silhouette shooting
2a. For flint locks we can pick the touch hole after loading. A soft wire pick, one of the dental floss tools, or a small brush for cleaning welding tips or paint sprayers will work. The quill of a bird's feather sized for touch hole will work if you just have to be authentic.
2b. For percussion locks, the blast from the ignition of the percussion cap blows the fouling in the flash channel out with the igniting powder charge.

The commonly encountered chambered breech: For a flint lock, there will normally be a direct touch hole into the chambered breech. For some flint chambers and percussion locks there will be an angled path from the touch hole then forward to the powder chamber. These are the most easily plugged with fouling as one wipes between shots as the wiping patch can't get into the chamber to clean out fouling. We have to rely on the ignition of the powder charge to keep that area somewhat clear. Since the chamber does not interface with the patched ball or bullet, we don't have to wipe that out during the shooting session. We just have to avoid filling the chamber and flash channel with fouling. Wipe the bore to the point where the ball sits on the powder.
1. Mark the loading/wiping rod at the length to about the top of the patched ball or bullet. Only wipe to that point
2. For a flint lock, the flexible dental flossing tool or the tip brush will keep the touch hole clean. The percussion cap will blow out the small amount of fouling.
Now we have to pay attention to the crusty ring that builds up at the base of the ball between the ball and the powder. If you are wiping past that crud ring, you are doing well. Sometimes you just have to wipe past the crusty ring to remove it and then a dry patch to pick up the pieces. It doesn't hurt to point the muzzle at the ground and bump the stock as LME suggests.
 
I never swab or clean till I am done shooting. If you use a good lube and patch it is not necessary. I have shot over 50 rounds in a row with out cleaning at shoots. Dutch's system needs cleaning because of the dry patches he used. Very accurate for target shooting but highly impractical for hunting. I don't swab after every shot I take when squirrel and rabbit hunting
 

Latest posts

Back
Top